• The Cycling News forum is still looking to add volunteer moderators with. If you're interested in helping keep our discussions on track, send a direct message to @SHaines here on the forum, or use the Contact Us form to message the Community Team.

    In the meanwhile, please use the Report option if you see a post that doesn't fit within the forum rules.

    Thanks!

Could Sky sponsorship end?

Page 2 - Get up to date with the latest news, scores & standings from the Cycling News Community.
Re: Re:

Axel Hangleck said:
MatParker117 said:
Dazed and Confused said:
pastronef said:
Dazed and Confused said:
To the question: One would hope so.

one of the single name sponsor, long lasting and stable sponsorships, already planning for the future (see Bernal's 5 year contract) and we hope it ends?

do we prefer sponsors coming and going and teams not sure of their future?


Let me repeat: I hope so.



Why? This is the best run team in the sport.

And that seems to be a problem for some/ a lot of cycling fans. Sky are run like a professional sports team should be run in 2018; some of the others seems to be still in the 20th Century. Yet people would seem to prefer the latter..

Some of you get the sport you deserve....

If the sport was run & promoted properly, then Sky wouldn't be the only 'big money' team; alas that isn't really the case.
Very good points. If there is to be a budget cap or a salary cap like
some of those that don't think anyone in cycling should get a good
pay packet want, it should be maybe five times what SKY's is now.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
samhocking said:
I was simply referencing the now, not what is happening in the future or misrepresenting your point. I don;t know, I did say it was my opinion btw ; )
Sky UK LTD regardless have 85% of the shares and I believe 75% voting rights (the other 10% is I assume British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc), so at the very most if Disney don't want their 15% share in TR Ltd after James Murdoch leaves that is not going to affect Jeremy Darroch's 75% say and BSkyB's 10%. As I said, I think unless Jeremy Darroch resigns or Comcast moves the direction of Sky UK Ltd (No sign Sky TV going anywhere different) not much will change out of the existing set-up, just like nothing is changing in Sky TV in UK either.
You don't actually get any of this, do you? This isn't an act, you actually don't get it, right?

We're talking about the future, how the change in ownership could - get that, could? - impact the team's financing.

You? God knows what you're talking about. Especially given you're still stuck in a pre-2014 past where there's a company actually called British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc. A world where everything's rosey, as always with you and anything Sky-related.

Maybe you need to do some research. British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc are not only a 2018/19 active company, but have an officer on TR Ltd's books! You don't understand the history of BskyB that's all, it's complicated. Active Company, but Dormant ( Corporation Tax purposes). Either way British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc are still active within Tour Racing Ltd with a 10% vote it looks like.

Christopher Jon TAYLOR (Appointments)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/officers/cERQBL7_5G6J0D7Pp-ZS2m8bwAs/appointments

British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc (Active Company)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09256967

Tour Racing Ltd (Active Company Officers)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04078205/officers
 
Re: Re:

samhocking said:
British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc (Active Company)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09256967
Oh, Sam, you are pure comedy gold. You should be on Dave. You offere me a lecture with a link to a company called BRITISH SKY BROADCASTING GROUP LIMITED. Which is a private limited company. But that is not British Sky Broadcasting Group plc. Which is a public limited compay (that's what plc stands for, remember?) and used to be the name of company that is today called Sky plc. Seriuously Sam, give it a rest. This stopped being funny days ago.
 
Mar 15, 2016
58
1
8,685
Re: Re:

Axel Hangleck said:
MatParker117 said:
Dazed and Confused said:
pastronef said:
Dazed and Confused said:
To the question: One would hope so.

one of the single name sponsor, long lasting and stable sponsorships, already planning for the future (see Bernal's 5 year contract) and we hope it ends?

do we prefer sponsors coming and going and teams not sure of their future?


Let me repeat: I hope so.



Why? This is the best run team in the sport.

And that seems to be a problem for some/ a lot of cycling fans. Sky are run like a professional sports team should be run in 2018; some of the others seems to be still in the 20th Century. Yet people would seem to prefer the latter..

Some of you get the sport you deserve....

If the sport was run & promoted properly, then Sky wouldn't be the only 'big money' team; alas that isn't really the case.
Completely agree. If the sport is to survive, Sky's "business model" is probably where the future lies.
Despite its global popularity, cycling is not generating sufficient revenues from the sport itself, probably because most racing takes place on week-day afternoons, when TV advertising rates are low.
 
I second the question.

Their "business model" appears to be to throw money at the best riders to amass superior talent.
That's not a rapier, it's a bludgeon. Bludgeon the competition into submission with money.

And it hasn't even fully worked. It's worked in stage races, where raw power usually wins. But in the classics where tactics and good management are important, the returns they've achieved over a decade of racing have been tiny taking into account the large masses of money invested.

Saying that this is a viable model for every team is insane. It's a business model that by its own definition only works if you are the only team with such a large budget. It's ridiculous to say that the future of the sport should be in every single team applying a business model that depends entirely on being unique to be successful.
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
samhocking said:
British Sky Broadcasting Group Plc (Active Company)
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09256967
Oh, Sam, you are pure comedy gold. You should be on Dave. You offere me a lecture with a link to a company called BRITISH SKY BROADCASTING GROUP LIMITED. Which is a private limited company. But that is not British Sky Broadcasting Group plc. Which is a public limited compay (that's what plc stands for, remember?) and used to be the name of company that is today called Sky plc. Seriuously Sam, give it a rest. This stopped being funny days ago.

My apoligies then, I thought you were suggesting BSkyB as an active company were not stakeholders in Team Sky, not arguing the subtle difference to them being LTD or PLC in terms of their 10% vote within TR Ltd. Admittedly I was cutting and pasting from my earlier posts PLC error rather than from companies house.
 
Re:

GuyIncognito said:
I second the question.

Their "business model" appears to be to throw money at the best riders to amass superior talent.
That's not a rapier, it's a bludgeon. Bludgeon the competition into submission with money.

And it hasn't even fully worked. It's worked in stage races, where raw power usually wins. But in the classics where tactics and good management are important, the returns they've achieved over a decade of racing have been tiny taking into account the large masses of money invested.

Saying that this is a viable model for every team is insane. It's a business model that by its own definition only works if you are the only team with such a large budget. It's ridiculous to say that the future of the sport should be in every single team applying a business model that depends entirely on being unique to be successful.

Depends what their business model is. For GC teams in the Tour, the TV exposure is supposedly 60-90% of the entire season depending on if you are in yellow or in the fight because Tour de France is the only bike race general public and sports fans watch. Giro & Vuelta is more a cycling fans event, not general public (In UK at least). If you went to local pub, nobody would even know what Giro or Vuelta is, letalone relate it to Sky as a brand anyway.
The distorted weight of Tour de France is ideally suited to how Sky buy up talent, because that's all non-cycling fans will watch and be exposed to in UK. Nobody in UK would know or be following Sky's performance outside Tour, put it that way.
 
Sky cycling, to me, seems only to exist as something between soccer seasons for Sky TV. That Eurosport broadcasts a 3 week long commercial for Sky, must have them laughing their heads off at Sky.
 
Re:

Jagartrott said:
Please explain what Sky's business model is, exactly?
One mega-sponsor that pours in money for a decade? You think that is going to work for 20-30 cycling teams?

The 'model' if you want to call it that, is not far removed from most European football leagues, the most commercially successful sports leagues on the planet.

Mega rich owners, pumping mega money into clubs to buy success.

A decade or so ago, it seemed grossly unfair, only a small handful of clubs had these rich owners, they were spending silly money to buy up the best talent and buy success. Sound familiar.

Fast forward to now, every self respecting club in the top European leagues has a billionaire owner pumping fantasy money into the club.

The big TV money has followed.

Now there's a debate that money has ruined football..but the multi millionaire players ain't complaining. The majority of fans attending matches at space age stadiums ain't complaining.

Cycling isn't football for sure.... but in a sport where only a very small handful of world level pros are truly rewarded for exceptional talent and hard work, where most teams live from year to year? Scratching around for new sponsors or disappearing altogether....maybe we need more Sky"s not less.

Maybe we're seeing the start of it...Chinese state money, Oil money? We can but hope...
 
Re:

Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
Politically it has helped, detoxifying the Murdoch brand in some circles by buying sporting pride at less cost to the State than Olympic bangles and baubles. Plus, in general, brand advertising, it's about keeping the name out there, and on that score Sky punches above its weight. (Personally it's the 21st Century Fox bit I don't get. I've watched films for the director, an actor, the original writer. But a studio? Apart from geeking out with a Ufa binge or a Mosfilm marathon, no, not really, a studio name won't bring me my local flea pit.)
 
Re: Re:

fmk_RoI said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
Politically it has helped, detoxifying the Murdoch brand in some circles by buying sporting pride at less cost to the State than Olympic bangles and baubles. Plus, in general, brand advertising, it's about keeping the name out there, and on that score Sky punches above its weight. (Personally it's the 21st Century Fox bit I don't get. I've watched films for the director, an actor, the original writer. But a studio? Apart from geeking out with a Ufa binge or a Mosfilm marathon, no, not really, a studio name won't bring me my local flea pit.)


TY.
 
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.
 
Re: Re:

Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.
 
Re: Re:

MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.


Ah, ok. Thank you. That makes sense then.
 
Re: Re:

Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.


Ah, ok. Thank you. That makes sense then.

Their core business is as a cable provider. They aren’t advertising their tv stations, their tv stations are content for their cable packages.
 
Re: Re:

Zinoviev Letter said:
Koronin said:
Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.


Ah, ok. Thank you. That makes sense then.

Their core business is as a cable provider. They aren’t advertising their tv stations, their tv stations are content for their cable packages.[/quote]


Thank you.
 
Re: Re:

Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.


Ah, ok. Thank you. That makes sense then.

Froome was doing PR for Sky España on a rest day at the 2017 Vuelta - posted a photo here somewheres. So much for resting!
 
Re: Re:

Robert5091 said:
Koronin said:
MatParker117 said:
MatParker117 said:
Koronin said:
I actually want to know what exactly a telecommunications company like Sky gets out of the sponsorship? What exactly is their return on investment?
In terms of equivalent ad spend it's over 10 to 1.

Are they more than basically just TV stations? Maybe I'm missing something, but at least over here TV stations don't advertise very often. The only example I can remember is the Cartoon Network sponsored a NASCAR car for like 2 years. However, part of that is tons of merchandise and it was a new station trying to get people to know about it to watch. Once they got viewer numbers to a certain point they stopped advertising. Maybe I'm missing something.

Also provide telephone and broadband internet services, recently launched in Spain, very active in Italy.


Ah, ok. Thank you. That makes sense then.

Froome was doing PR for Sky España on a rest day at the 2017 Vuelta - posted a photo here somewheres. So much for resting![/quote]


Those rest days just mean no racing. :lol:
 
Re: Re:

Robert5091 said:
Froome was doing PR for Sky España on a rest day at the 2017 Vuelta - posted a photo here somewheres. So much for resting!
I hope they're selling tickets for when you find out about contract negotations during the Tour's rest days. That I want to see.
 
I'm more likely to take the bait and look into getting a Sky subscription than I am to nip down to my local Middle Eastern nations dealer and pick up a Bahrain or a UAE; or to start doing price comparisons on where to buy a Katusha or an Astana on-line. Or even to buy a French, Belgian or Dutch lottery ticket.
 

Latest posts